Help me set up a Rem 700

Yes, upgrade it to a McMillan and I think Talley Lightweight mediums will facilitate a 50mm.

If it were mine I would start by taking the rifle out with a few different loads and see how it shoots for you. Develop a baseline. Then with that done start to worry about improvements, one step at a time. You want the rifle as a hunting rifle so see if it shoots like a good hunting rifle. I would not do anything with it untill after a few shooting sessions with it as it is now.

Ron

Make sure it shoots well before going for a stock upgrade.

If iits gonna see tough use, go with a good steel base and rings. Hs precision, or b&c stock with aluminum bedding block.

for a scope, i suggest a decent 3-9x40 (leupold vx-2). leupold mounts and rings are available at most shops and will last a lifetime, and their scopes have a lifetime warranty (as do some others)..

get your scope, mount it up, grab 2 or 3 different factory loads, and go to the range. since deer seem your primary game, 150gr, 165gr, or 180gr will all suffice.

some rifles shoots great right out of the box, so no need to change anything unless accuracy is not what you expect (and remember you own a "hunting" rifle, not a match rifle).

1 to 1.5" at 100 is more than accurate for anything out to 350yards, and most folks have no business shooting that far as they never practice at such distances.

good luck

I have become a big fan of the Burris Signature Z rings and inserts, as well as the DNZ one piece mounts/bases. For a hunting rifle, I would go with the DNZ - looks great, A+ quality and fewer parts too.

I put a B&C Medalist on my SPS and I have been extremely happy with it. Not a McM or Manners, but for me, its been great. For rings and base I went with TPS (steel, not aluminum).

Shoot it first. You will probably find it is just fine in the factroy stock. I have SEVERAL friends shooting those in factory stocks with great accuracy and no issues.

I personally prefer McMillans and most of my guns have them. I like them because they are better quality, about 1/2 lb lighter than the factory plastic and just plain look better. Telling your wife it will make the gun more accurate and will help justify the expense, but I've never seen a rifle shoot better with an expensive aftermarket stock. If it does, it is because there is an issue with the factroy stock that could have been corrected.

I see no reason to use anything but Talley Lightweights unless you want QD mounts. They are relatively inexpensive, about 1/4 lb lighter than steel, stronger than steel and much easier to mount.

Why a 40mm objective? I was thinking the 50 would give me much better low light performance.

Click to expand...

The quality of the glass is a much greater factor in light transmission than the size of the glass. With equal quality glass a 50mm lense offers a theoretical advantage. But a quality 50mm lense will cost far more than a quality 40mm lense. You are more likely to get better low light performance from most 40mm lenses because there is more quality for the dollar.

Even then it depends on the power setting your scope is set on. A 50mm lense set at 10X lets in 5mm of light. Exactly the same as a 40mm lense set on 8X. On any power setting lower than 8X, or greater than 10X the end result is exactly the same. Most humans can only use about 5mm of light, any more is wasted. So even if you are using a high quality 50mm lense, it will only be an advantage if set on 9X or 10X. And only for about 5 minutes of each day.

Get a quality 40mm scope and mount it low where it needs to be an forget about a 50mm.

Set up

I use a one piece picanty base and you'd do good with a set of warne medium perma rings. I use that setup on my 7 mag

I have an SPS and absolutely hate the factory stock. You can't float them either because they don't have the forend strength to support the weight of the barrel. But before you decide on replacing it, see how it groups first. Remington designed those to group pretty nicely with the standard pressure bedding concept.

As for glass, Vortex is producing some pretty decent glass, but my personal choice has always been Leupold. And there is no real concern as to 50mm v.s. 40mm. I find the 40mm is all the light necessary, if glass quality is high quality, you won't have any noticable disadvantage.

I have always had excellent results with Burris Z rings. I've also used Leupold rings and mounts, but I still think the Z rings are at least as good if not better.

Ammunition, well I reload so can't recommend factory ammunition.

GS

I was thinking the 50 would give me much better low light performance.

Click to expand...

In some conditions, it will.

I'm actually in the same boat! I'm in Ohio and am building a 700 for hogs here locally and everything else abroad, but mostly banging steel at about 500 yards.

I went with a .308 just cause I fell into a deal on a Hart barreld and blueprinted action.

It's wearing a fiberglass stock now thats pretty lightweight and pretty dang stiff. It's beded and floated but isn't the best fit for me and my gorilla arms. In the future, a Bell and Carlson stock with some detachable bottom metal may be in order if funds allow.

As for glass, if I could settle on one scope for this rifle, it'd be sitting in a DNZ mount, they're solid, light, don't need to be lapped, look nice, and they're pretty inexpensive.

I'm going to use a different scope for load development and ringing steel (maybe a match or two too!) and a different one for hunting. I'm going to order up a Badger Ordnance picitiany base and use Warne QD rings on my scopes. I figured the 4x14 FFP mil/mil scope for more precision work might be less than ideal once in the woods. Either a 2x7 or maybe even a illuminated 1x4 would be nice as I typically like to use less magnification than most it seems.